3 ms·
> Nope, don't understand the trade offs if you're suggesting scrum is slower than waterfall. That just doesn't line up with my experience. "Results may vary,"
by AllegedAlec 8y ago
> Nope, don't understand the trade offs if you're suggesting scrum is slower than waterfall. That just doesn't line up with my experience. "Results may vary," though.
The idea is that if you have a well defined problem domain and you know exactly what the software is that you have to deliver, you don't need the short cycles, and all the meetings and pokering and whatnot would just be a waste of time. You know what you need to make, so you can just continue working.
- nickelcitymario 8y agoI suppose that makes sense "if you have a well defined problem domain and you know exactly what the software is that you have to deliver". I don't have a lot of experience in such areas though, and i can't help but wonder how often that's the case. If my problem domain was well defined, the problem would probably already be solved by someone and I'd use their code. Why reinvent? Am I being too simplistic?
- AllegedAlec 8y ago> If my problem domain was well defined, the problem would probably already be solved by someone and I'd use their code. Not necessarily. Look for example at the team that made the code for the central computers of the Space Shuttle. They knew exactly what their code had to do, how fast, etc et.